From: Kurt Bergsbaken (kbergsbaken@yahoo.com)
Date: Sat Dec 13 2003 - 22:27:34 GMT-3
A very common approach below. Giving strict priority
to RTP packets up to 800k on a T-1.
policy-map Voip
class voice
priority 800
class control
bandwidth 128
class class-default
fair-queue
class-map voice
match access-group 101
class-map voice
match access-group 102
access-list 101 permit udp any any range 16384 32767
access-list 102 permit tcp any any eq 1720
!
!
Remembering that by default an IP Phone will mark
voice packets with an IP Precedence of 5, and
signaling with 3, a somewhat more elegant solution
that leverages this classification also works well.
class-map match-all VoIP-Control
match access-group 101
class-map match-all VoIP-RTP
match access-group 100
!
!
policy-map QoS-Policy
class VoIP-RTP
priority 800
class VoIP-Control
bandwidth 128
class class-default
fair-queue
access-list 100 permit ip any any precedence critical
access-list 100 permit ip any any dscp ef
access-list 101 permit ip any any precedence flash
access-list 101 permit ip any any dscp af31
Don't know if this answers the question, but typically
TP streams.
--- Alec <clapun@graduate.hku.hk> wrote:
> If I am asked to build a class-map for voice without
> any specific parameters
> given, will you include the signalling protocol, ie.
> TCP/UDP port 1719/1720
> in additional to the RTP streams as well ?
>
> rgds,
> alec
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Kurt Bergsbaken" <kbergsbaken@yahoo.com>
> To: "Kaiser Anwar" <kaiseranwar@sbcglobal.net>;
> <ccielab@groupstudy.com>
> Sent: Thursday, December 11, 2003 11:54 PM
> Subject: Re: udp port range
>
>
> > depending on the IOS, I believe, the range command
> can
> > be deceptive. It can mean - all ports in the range
> > from 16384 including the next 16383 ports. Both
> > statements below can actually be correct, and
> define
> > ports 16xxx- 32xxx.
> >
> > --- Kaiser Anwar <kaiseranwar@sbcglobal.net>
> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > > have a question about UDP ports for voice.
> when
> > > creatin an access-list i
> > > have seen where some use range 16384 32768 or
> 16384
> > > 16383.
> > > which on is correct. Thanks in advance.
> > >
> > > Kaiser A
> > >
> > >
> >
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Jan 03 2004 - 08:25:40 GMT-3